Leftists Are Slowly Realizing That They Have No Path To Victory Pt 1
by Brett Stevens on December 2, 2020
http://www.amerika.org/politics/leftists-are-slowly-realizing-that-they-have-no-path-to-victory/
It got quiet out there again. A few days ago, activity picked up to that kind of frenzied pace that suggests people distracting themselves. It happened right after the Barr announcement, when that failed to be the magic bullet that made Trump go away. The complex reality set in moments later.
Now people are back to depression (mental, not economic, although that too is coming) behavior. They are staying in, watching the news obsessively, drinking too much screw-top wine, and generally feeling pretty bad about things. An ominous quiet descends.
Slowly it is dawning upon the Left, not so much the leadership but the supporters, that this is not going to end well, and therefore, it has already ended, and not well for them. In fact, they are only seeing the first swells of a wave.
As said here before, Trump now has two tasks in front of him: secure the presidency and terminate the Swamp. The first will be a Constitutional case, and the second will involve a variety of methods. At least some of those will succeed, and that is enough.
The Supreme Court established a solid standard in Bush v. Gore (2000):
Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another. See, e.g., Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U.S. 663, 665 (1966) (“[O]nce the franchise is granted to the electorate, lines may not be drawn which are inconsistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment”).
…The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for non-arbitrary treatment of voters necessary to secure the fundamental right.
…The record provides some examples. A monitor in Miami-Dade County testified at trial that he observed that three members of the county canvassing board applied different standards in defining a legal vote. 3 Tr. 497, 499 (Dec. 3, 2000). And testimony at trial also revealed that at least one county changed its evaluative standards during the counting process.
…The recount process, in its features here described, is inconsistent with the minimum procedures necessary to protect the fundamental right of each voter in the special instance of a statewide recount under the authority of a single state judicial officer.
In other words, any state action which does not treat all voters the same falls afoul of this standard, including last-minute changes to how things are done. You will note, if you read carefully, that Trump and Giuliani hit on each one of the examples given in the case in their own public complaints.
We have many examples of the state doing things differently for different classes of voters, the biggest being that mail-in voters were not subjected to the scrutiny that normal voters faced. This means that the great Leftist election theft of 2000 is going to go badly in the courts.
For example, look at how state legislators made unequal voting through changes to the vote procedure in Pennsylvania:
Democrat PA Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar asked the Democrat larded Supreme Court for more time to count ballots than by the original Election Day deadline.
She also requested all mail-in ballots be accepted whether signatures on ballots match voter rolls or not. In both cases, Democrats granted the Democrats requests.
Hundreds of thousands of unsupervised mail-in ballots came flooding in to be counted days after Election Day with Donald Trump ahead in Pennsylvania by over 600,000 votes at the time.
Miraculously, that epic lead would not only evaporate, but Joe Biden would supposedly take the vote lead nearly a week later.
Couple this with the obvious election fraud in Michigan, the weird disqualification of voters in Nevada, the dual residence voters in Georgia, and the many instances of voters finding that their vote had already been cast via mail-in ballot, and you have a situation where Trump will win.